Mary, Our Lady of Sorrows, Softener of Evil Hearts, pray for us.
In a statement posted on his website in Italian, the modern Confessor of the Faith, Cardinal Zen, has asserted that Tucho “Heal Me With Your Mouth” Fernández would be very happy if the SSPX were excommunicated, since His Eminence, head of the Office Formerly Known as Holy, “intends to dismantle the traditions of the Church” (intende disfare le tradizioni della Chiesa).
Let’s read through the statement in translation and make a few comments. The following translation comes from Rorate Caeli noting a few things from the Italian. The emphasis is in the original.
—
The SSPX Case (l Caso SSPX)
Faced with the SSPX situation, it seems that even traditionalists are divided. This is very understandable — there are two things to consider. A) A schism must be avoided at all costs, because it will cause serious and lasting damage to the Church; but on the other hand, B) one must also respect a serious matter of conscience: “How can anyone be compelled to follow teachings that clearly deny the Holy Tradition of the Church?”
So how can this case be resolved?
The SSPX have been sent to dialogue with the head of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith — but is there even a minimal hope from this dialogue? (ma c’è un minimo di speranza da questo dialogo?)
Reading the first reading and the following responsorial psalm from today’s Mass, it seems one can view it this way:
Joseph → SSPX
Joseph’s brothers → Cardinal Tucho
Reuben→ Pope Leo (perhaps with the help of H.E. Bishop Schneider)
“His brothers hated him.”
Tucho, who intends to dismantle (intende disfare) the traditions of the Church — how could he not hate the SSPX? He will probably be quite pleased to see them excommunicated!
So is there no hope left?
There is Reuben, the good brother!
There is Leo, the good Father!
The unity of God’s family is close to his heart! But what if his sons do not accept the Council?
Pope Leo is someone who listens! He understands, and he will help his sons understand that certain things carried out in the name of the so-called “spirit of the Council” — but contrary to the Tradition of the Church — are not actually of the Council!
And the TLM? Wanting to eliminate it is clearly a mistake. The Novus Ordo did not respect the intentions of the Council Fathers (H.E. Athanasius Schneider has gathered abundant evidence on this point).
Pope Benedict, when speaking of the “reform of the reform,” acknowledged the possibility of the two forms of the Roman Rite enriching one another mutually.
Let us place our trust in Pope Leo — he has begun a catechesis on the Documents of the [Vatican II] Council, and it is to those documents that we must all return!
—
First, we note that His Eminence Cardinal Zen confirms what all appearances indicate: Tucho Fernández is not interested in doctrine, but is, prima facie, a “yes man” from Pope Francis. The document against Our Lady’s titles Mediatrix of All Graces and Co-Redemptrix seemed to point this out: Tucho admitted that the doctrine was entirely Catholic and Magisterially confirmed.. but denied the titles because Pope Francis (and Ratzinger said so) (“‘Most Holy Theotokos, Save Us!’” – on the New Vatican Document about Marian Titles”).
Second, we note that His Eminence Cardinal Zen very rightly points out the Catholic doctrine of conscience – what are the faithful to do when all the conciliar Popes defend the right of conscience for Catholics and non-Catholics, and yet seem to deny this same right to the SSPX and their faithful? Indeed, as Mr. Charles Coulombe notes, the real question is whether the Vatican should pursue Ecumenism with the SSPX or not.
Finally, Cardinal Zen calls the faithful to adhere to the Second Vatican Council’s texts. Here is where many Trads will be challenged, but I must say I agree. The problem is that the SSPX adheres to 95% of the Council, while many bishops and priests are heretics who probably only accept 5% of the Council’s texts but are, nevertheless, in “full communion”
But let me say this: Trads are shooting ourselves in the foot if we continue to produce sophomoric “meme” level attacks on Vatican II. We have to be better than that. Otherwise we hurt our own movement.
I have already begun my attempt to describe what seems to me to be the “Trad Mishandling of Vatican II.” The first point I make here is to point out that the hyperüberultramontanism that enabled the Novus Ordo Missae is entirely a pre-Vatican II issue. Moreover, the prooftexts which provide the theological basis for resisting the Novus Ordo Missae come from Vatican II and the New Catechism.
Now the SSPX has three main critiques of Vatican II: Religious liberty, Collegiality and Ecumenism – these are all valid critiques. However in my experience, some of this seems to suffer from a superficiality based on a view of Tradition which is locked in 19th century papal encyclicals, and fails to take account of the traditional Eastern Catholic view of these things.
I have read They Have Uncrowned Him, which seems to be the strongest argument against Vatican II (even though this too does not face the reality of Leo XIII and Pius XII’s advocacy for Christian democracy).
But from a traditional Eastern Catholic perspective, the SSPX critique of Collegiality and Ecumenism are superficial – they fail to make the distinction between true and false Collegiality, true and false Ecumenism.
I have a 500-page book defending true Ecumenism against false Ecumenism. It is unfortunate that so few Trads take account of the fact that Pope St. Paul VI established the concept of “dialogue” as a method to convert others to Catholicism, i.e. a Socratic dialogue (see his encyclical Ecclesiam Suam). Paul VI also confirmed that the post-Vatican II crisis was “Modernism” and cited Pascendi. Here’s a podcast summary of the book:
Collegiality, meanwhile, is a welcome development for all Eastern Catholics, after the false spirit of Vatican One seriously hindered Tradition (conceding to Lefebvre that it is true that Collegiality has been used as a weapon against the sovereignty of each bishop in his own diocese).
I have read through Pope Leo’s catechesis on Vatican II thusfar, and I have presented my findings to the OnePeterFive Confraternity exclusive Telegram group. In short, Pope Leo’s whole hermeneutic seems to be the same as traditionalist Michael J. Carroll in his book Ascent of Man to God: Vatican II and the Hermeneutic of Deification.
In Pope Leo’s first catechesis, he quotes Pope St. John Paul the First saying that the whole program is about sanctity and holiness. He then proceeds through Dei Verbum with a hermeneutic of deification – the whole point of Vatican II, for Pope Leo it seems, is Lumen Gentium chapter 5: the universal call to holiness.
The universal call to holiness is the most challenging and neglected doctrine of Vatican II, which was defended before the Council by Fr. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange. Only the Holy Ghost can prevent schism on July 1 – but we have a role to play and that is holiness – God will judge each of us in what we did and said in these weeks leading up to the Consecrations. Did we strive for holiness and beseech the Mother of God to heal this tension?
I say then, walk in the spirit, and you shall not fulfill the lusts of the flesh. For the flesh lusteth against the spirit: and the spirit against the flesh; for these are contrary one to another: so that you do not the things that you would. But if you are led by the spirit, you are not under the law. Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are fornication, uncleanness, immodesty, luxury, Idolatry, witchcrafts, enmities, contentions, emulations, wraths, quarrels, dissensions, sects,
Envies, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like. Of the which I foretell you, as I have foretold to you, that they who do such things shall not obtain the kingdom of God. But the fruit of the Spirit is, charity, joy, peace, patience, benignity, goodness, longanimity, Mildness, faith, modesty, continency, chastity. Against such there is no law. And they that are Christ’s, have crucified their flesh, with the vices and concupiscences. If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.
Let us not be made desirous of vain glory, provoking one another, envying one another. Brethren, and if a man be overtaken in any fault, you, who are spiritual, instruct such a one in the spirit of meekness, considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted. Bear ye one another’s burdens; and so you shall fulfill the law of Christ. (Gal. v. 16ff)
T. S. Flanders
Editor
Friday in the II Week of Lent